4 ms·
I scale my CAD-like software to high core counts. Memory performance from the hardware side isn't a tunable parameter. If you need the performance, AMD has no
by frozenport 9y ago
I scale my CAD-like software to high core counts. Memory performance from the hardware side isn't a tunable parameter.
If you need the performance, AMD has no product in this space.
- sliken 9y agoMemory performance is just as tunable as core count. Ryzen = 2 channels, Threadripper = 4 channels, and Epyc is 8 channels per socket for 1 or 2 sockets. So there's a factor of 8 to pick from. I'd be surprised that a CAD program prefers cores over memory bandwidth. Generally if you have a complicated 3D object doing anything with that object isn't going to be cache friendly. Have you tried your CAD-like software on two platforms with the same core count but double the memory channels?
- frozenport 9y agoYeah, so a large part of my optimization is to move from memory to compute bound. But things like matrix inversion, for example, thanks to the hard work of library authors can scale pretty well. This happens on the CPU because the data typically exceeds GPU memory. So, you can get out the box scaling for much of your code. The 3D rendering is taken care by the GPU.
- CyberDildonics 9y agoCAD 'needs' 70 cores and CAD is VR? Let's not get carried away.